Gerard wrote:
<start>
Hoi,
Define unreasonable. Amir gave an estimation when it is reasonable to
expect a result.
Thanks,
GerardM
<end>
For the current instance, based on where we are now, Amir's estimation is fine.
As long as someone is actually trying to follow up on these projects, and gives
a reasonable estimate as to how long it will take, I'm fine.
James's question, and mine, is more around the big picture. Please remember
that three of the four projects we are talking about here (Guiane Creole WP,
Saraiki WP, Tacawit Wiktionary) were identified in an email I wrote on 17
December 2018 (about eight months ago) as already being provisionally approved
and awaiting language verification. The fourth (Mon WP) is perhaps a month
newer. But 7-8 months and longer—Saraiki WP was provisionally approved in
October 2018—is absolutely not reasonable by any standard. Quite frankly, I
was desperate to do something to move these along, because being nice and
playing by the rules was doing absolutely nothing. (Remember, too, that I wrote
pleasant, polite reminders to the committee about these four projects on March
14 and June 6.) I'm sorry, Gerard, that you didn't like me doing what I did.
But what I did is far less objectionable than requiring communities to wait
this long for us to complete language verification.
To that end, I am proposing the following amendment to the provision about
language verification. I am open to some adjustments, but allowing projects to
sit this long and wait for us is just not acceptable. Where this amendment is
to be added is in the Language Committee's Handbook, Final
Approval<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_committee/Handbook_(committee)#Final_approval>,
item #2. Subitem #3 is to be followed by new subitem #4:
4. The Language Committee has 30 days from the time a project is provisionally
approved—meaning: approved, except for language verification—to identify and
contact an expert for the language verification. If no expert is contacted
within 30 days, then on the assumption of good faith, the project will be
finally approved. If an expert is contacted within 30 days, the Language
Committee has an additional 60 days to obtain the final language verification.
If no language verification (or failure of language verification) is received
by then, on the assumption of good faith, the project will be finally approved.
Overall, any project for which the Language Committee has failed to get
language verification (or failure of language verification) within 90 days will
be approved on the assumption of good faith.
I think this gives us plenty of time to do what we need to do, without
requiring communities to wait on us for months without comment. This would
apply for all projects receiving provisional approval from this point on. But
in parallel, given that Amir started working on these four projects around
August 15, I would also propose that if we have not finalized language
verification by October 15, these four projects also be finally approved.
Steven
Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook>
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
